Equality on Trial

Happy Thanksgiving! – open thread

November 27, 2014

By Scottie Thomaston

Community/Meta

Happy Thanksgiving, everyone!

This is an open thread to talk about holiday plans, news, or whatever else.

Equality On Trial will be back on Monday.

Also, the site issues and recent slowness should be fixed now – everything should be running smoother.

Equality news round-up: Mississippi, Arkansas... Mississippi marriage plaintiffs ask Fifth Circuit...

3435391 CommentsHappy+Thanksgiving%21+-+open+thread2014-11-27+17%3A19%3A00Scottie+Thomaston

1. sfbob | November 27, 2014 at 10:10 am

Happy Thanksgiving to everyone.

(On an unrelated note the page is appearing in the mobile theme even though I'm not on my phone. Okay, now it's fixed).
2. KACinSTL | November 28, 2014 at 12:17 pm

I have the opposite, I always view on phone but the past day has forced me onto the desktop view hah
3. sfbob | November 28, 2014 at 1:19 pm

When I'm on my phone I always switch from the mobile version to the full version.
4. hopalongcassidy | November 27, 2014 at 10:32 am

Fingers crossed, the turkey is in our new smoker, 4 more hours to go. I hope!

(First try for fowl, we did ribs that came out great!)
5. Ryan K (a.k.a. KELL) | November 28, 2014 at 6:02 am

So how did the new smoker do for your butterball?
6. hopalongcassidy | November 28, 2014 at 7:55 am

I almost left it in too long but it was great! Just a tiny little bit dry in the breast but we like the dark better anyway! Thanks! Hope you had a good TG too!
7. Ryan K (a.k.a. KELL) | November 28, 2014 at 8:27 am

I love a good smoked meal, provide such a great flavor to the bird (or any meat you use)! I'm all dark meat here as well, so I wouldn't have complained a bit!

It was a great Thanksgiving here in Raleigh, NC as well, thank you for asking. Looking forward to leftovers, football, and some relaxation. Cheers to you!
8. davepCA | November 27, 2014 at 10:33 am

Happy Thanksgiving, folks! I'm visiting my mom & siblings down here in Orange County, CA, a conservative section of California sometimes referred to as "behind the Orange Curtain". Something I'm very thankful for is the fact that my mom has always been a rather vocal liberal 'troublemaker' around here. Some of the long-time participants on this site may remember the NOM California bus tour with Carly Fiorina, when my mom chased down the NOM bus so she could protest against them with a sign reading 'equal marriage rights for my gay son!'. Not your typical little-old-lady : ) You go, mom!
9. sfbob | November 27, 2014 at 1:34 pm

Your mom and mine would get along very well. Although she never went as far as to chase the NOM bus down the street she DID lobby all of her neighbors to vote against Prop 8. She turned 89 yesterday.
10. Margo Schulter | November 27, 2014 at 10:40 am

Happy Thanksgiving to all, as we maybe move toward having marriage equality in 3/4 of the States. This is mainly a test to see if people can read this message. On a terminal at the local university with a graphical browser, my comments don’t show up when I look at the pages here, although they do show up when I do a Google search. Now and then there are responses, so I’m guessing that there could be browser-specific factors involved.
11. Scottie Thomaston | November 27, 2014 at 11:09 am

I can definitely read it. Very strange.
12. hopalongcassidy | November 28, 2014 at 10:31 am

Loud & clear here w/Firefox. I'll try IE and see
13. hopalongcassidy | November 28, 2014 at 10:35 am

Was fine on IE too but I did get a warning to update JavaScript…however I said go ahead and remind me later and was able to read it fine. That might be a clue but don't know exactly what it might mean.
14. RnL2008 | November 28, 2014 at 11:47 am

I can read it and reply to it…..by the way, I use Google Chrome as my internet browser……had an issue with IE and Modzilla……no problem with Google Chrome!!!
15. jpmassar | November 27, 2014 at 11:09 am

BRATISLAVA, SLOVAKIA
Slovakia will hold a referendum on same-sex marriage in the predominantly Roman Catholic country on Feb. 7, the president said Thursday.

President Andrej Kiska's move comes after the Alliance for Family conservative group gathered about 400,000 signatures supporting the vote.

Slovaks will be asked whether they agree that a marriage can be called only a union between a man and a woman, same-sex partners can't adopt children, and that children wouldn't have to attend school classes on sex education if their parents don't agree with them.

Slovakia's constitutional court ruled last month at Kiska's request that such a referendum doesn't violate the constitution, but rejected a question on registered partnership as part of the vote.

Kiska said he still has doubts about the referendum, but respected the ruling.

Slovakia doesn't allow same-sex partners to live in registered partnerships and the country's constitution was already amended earlier this year to define marriage as a union between a man and a woman.

To be legally binding, turnout in the ballot must be more than 50 percent in the nation of 5.4 million people. In the previous seven referendums since Slovakia gained independence in 1993 after the split of Czechoslovakia, only the referendum on the country's entry into the European Union met the condition.

Another EU nation, Croatia, banned same-sex marriages in a referendum last year.

http://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/community/g…
16. Wolf of Raging Fires | November 28, 2014 at 9:29 am

So, the haters already got what they wanted last year and now they want to hammer gay Slovaks further into the dirt…got it.
17. franklinsewell | November 27, 2014 at 11:51 am

SCOTUSBlog reports RBG is out of the hospital.
18. Ryan K (a.k.a. KELL) | November 27, 2014 at 12:06 pm

A very warm and sincere Thanksgivng to each and every person and their families on this fourth Thursday of November. I'm up in NC at my parents (ironically my marriage is recognized while here, but not home in Florida) enjoying lots of food and drink with family and friends.

(And I'm VERY thankful that the site is operating normally…I was having withdrawls!)
19. Margo Schulter | November 27, 2014 at 3:51 pm

Scottie, thank you for your helpful response, and for your many valuable posts and other efforts that make this site possible.

It’s really exciting that we have more States with marriage equality than permitted interracial marriage at the time of Loving. If the Sixth Circuit’s anomalous ruling is an invitation to SCOTUS that the percolation is now accomplished and that it’s time for the remaining States and other jurisdictions to wake up and smell the coffee, then this long journey to marriage equality may soon be finished.

Thank you, Scottie, for your role as a wonderful guide on this journey not quite yet over.
20. David_Midvale_UT | November 28, 2014 at 4:18 pm

A thumbs-up seems so inadequate so. . .

Huzzah!
21. SethInMaryland | November 27, 2014 at 6:52 pm

there was panel today with of all the party leaders of in Finland , the majority of them were in favor of marriage equality,one of the leaders of Swedish ties partysaid that marriage equality WILL pass narrowly
22. DrPatrick1 | November 27, 2014 at 7:07 pm

Happy turkey day everyone!

We are celebrating FRIENDSgiving tomorrow. We let Thursday be the day to spend with those you must, but Friday is for spending with those you choose! The hubby was busy cooking and baking all day today, while I took our oldest for a ski day with daddy. Tomorrow we have all of our friends and chosen family coming for what will surely be a wonderful time.
23. mariothinks | November 28, 2014 at 4:19 am

I wonder how Sutton feels since they just legalized gender-neutral marriage in Finland:
http://yle.fi/uutiset/finnish_parliament_approves…
24. Zack12 | November 28, 2014 at 4:39 am

I doubt he cares.
Bigots seldom do.
25. mariothinks | November 28, 2014 at 4:48 am

I meant it in terms of him using Finland in his opinion as one of the "progressive democracies" that doesn't have same-sex marriage, so it's not a big deal if we don't do so as well. The other country he cites is Australia, which seems like will come off that list soon too. He's going to feel real crunchy as his opinion unravels before him.
26. Zack12 | November 28, 2014 at 7:37 am

He'll likely spin it as that how the system works and if we wait just a little bit longer, that will be the case here.
He will of course neglect to mention the fact there is no chance in hell TN,KY and MI will join the 21st century on their own.
27. ebohlman | November 29, 2014 at 1:07 am

He'll also neglect to mention that all the remaining state bans are baked into their state constitutions and that changing those is (because it should be) a very slow process (often requires votes of two separate legislative sessions followed by a popular vote, meaning at least 3 years).

IOW, the remaining bans have been deliberately put outside the normal democratic process. While that may not be unconstitutional in itself (see Bruning), it hardly insulates the bans from judicial review.
28. Zack12 | November 29, 2014 at 6:41 am

Sutton and Cook know that but since they are right wing hacks, they don't care.
29. FinnAtHelsinki | November 28, 2014 at 11:19 pm

What?! He used us as an example? I was not aware of that, and could have lived without knowing 😀 How embarrasing that our failure to enact marriage equality earlier contributed to his rhetorical tool set. Well, that's corrected now. Hopefully Australia acts soon too.
30. mariothinks | November 29, 2014 at 7:47 am

Lol Yeah, he totally used your country like that. But it's okay, because now you have the last laugh; you (and Finland) make his opinion look stupid, dated, and out-of-touch. 🙂
31. Terence | November 28, 2014 at 9:23 am

Approved, not yet legalized. From the same report:

"The reform will force wide-ranging changes in other legislation, which will take well over a year to finalise. The law will therefore not take effect until 2016 at the earliest."
32. Wolf of Raging Fires | November 28, 2014 at 9:32 am

Well, he for sure won't be doing this:

A-WIGGLE, A-WIGGLE WIGGLE WIGGLE
WIGGLE WIGGLE WIGGLE
WIGGLE WIGGLE WIGGLE WIGGLE WIGGLE WIGGLE!!!
33. guitaristbl | November 28, 2014 at 4:52 am

Congrats to Finland 🙂 Last nordic country to approve ME, finally ! Australia next and then the US hopefully !
34. SPQRobin | November 28, 2014 at 6:27 am

Yay, this is awesome! 🙂 I want Germany next too!

In smaller European news today: Andorra approved "separate but equal" civil unions, including adoption rights. And in Jersey, the government said it will draft legislation for same-sex marriage by the end of 2017.
35. Randolph_Finder | November 28, 2014 at 11:59 am

Finland isn't actually a full approval, there are at least two steps left to go (committee and then another vote of the whole. Best guess is no marriage for at least 18 months from today. *And* there is an election likely between now and the end of the process. Still *could* come off the rails if the next parliament is more anti-marriage.

But still *wonderful* that it passed.
36. guitaristbl | November 28, 2014 at 2:01 pm

I expresses the same concerns to Finnish people online but they said this was the decisive vote, even with the upcoming elections and polling showing the center party which opposes ME in principle in the lead. No party (not even the nationalists who are 3rd currently) wants to bother with this or derail government formation because of this. In Finland there are always coalition governments due to the electoral sustem they use. The anti ME parties (Center Party, True Finns, Christian Democrats) won't gather enough votes most likely to form a government, so the pro ME parties (National coalition, Socialists, Left, Greens, Swedish party) will be needed to a greater or lesser degree to do it (if they do not form a government themselves without the anti ME parties) and I doubt they would stay in a government the would scrap an already approved at first stage bill.

Analysts say it is extremely unlikely and marriages will start at 2016 or March of 2017.
37. Randolph_Finder | November 28, 2014 at 5:08 pm

I'm less concerned about a flip of who is in control of the coalition, but rather you could have enough of a shift in who is actually in the Parliament that it could shift to majority anti-Marriage Equality…
38. FinnAtHelsinki | November 28, 2014 at 10:49 pm

It won't happen and it doesn't matter any way 🙂 The initiative will be voted into a law by the current parliament. As you previously said, it now goes into a committee (Grand Committee) and returns to another vote by the whole parliament, but these happen within a few weeks. After that the marriage equality becomes law which takes effect in 2017.

The next parliament has to pass some associated legislation, but this is more of housekeeping and strictly speaking not necessary for marriage equality (although the courts would probably not like the small mess the inaction by the next parliament would create for them).

While it is within the limits of possibility that the next parliament could refuse to pass the associated legislation, this is very unlikely. And the prospect of it trying to overturn the marriage equality is practically zero. We Finns tend to be pragmatic, and few of the MPs who voted against the initiative yesterday are willing to revisit the issue (ever). Many of them have already indicated this. They want to move on.

Also, this will be the first citizen initiative voted into law by the parliament. And it is supported by the majority of Finnish people. No party boss in his or her right mind would try to overturn it in next parliament, not even the head of True Finns party. The sh*t storm would leave both the party in question and the Finnish democracy severely wounded. The price in political capital is simply too high and political gain too small.

Yesterday's vote was decisive, and it will be last official word on marriage equality in Finland. Sure, there will be a few voices trying to make this an election issue, but it won't work.
39. RemC_Chicago | November 29, 2014 at 6:02 am

Thank you for this thorough and enlightening explanation!
40. guitaristbl | November 29, 2014 at 7:36 am

http://yle.fi/uutiset/rasanen_vows_to_challenge_s…

Can she and her party actually do anything ? They seem willing to continue fighting..
41. FinnAtHelsinki | November 29, 2014 at 12:20 pm

Short answer: no 🙂

Longer answer: This is small party which has consistently been and will continue to be against marriage equality. But they will not hold sway over this. They are neither needed nor in all likelihood wanted to the governing coalition after the elections, and they will have very few MPs. For the reasons above, the larger parties can't afford to collaborate with them on this issue.

You can decide for yourself whether I should have added "except Paivi Rasanen of Christian Democrats" in connection to the "no party boss in his or her right mind" above.
42. guitaristbl | November 29, 2014 at 12:58 pm

Well they are polling very low from what I have seen..The leader of the True Finns already said that such issues won't be on the table when the talks about government formation will start. I hope that they won't get enough votes to be able to create a government along with the Center Party and the Christian Democrats only though.
43. Randolph_Finder | December 1, 2014 at 4:45 am

Thank you for explaining this.

Next stop Estonia. 🙂
44. SethInMaryland | November 28, 2014 at 6:52 am

congrats Finland , all of the Nordic countries are now complete, and now it little friend next over estonia needs to be the one take to the next step, this country influcened by Finland
45. Zack12 | November 28, 2014 at 8:53 am

I just bought the book Winning Marriage and it is a solid read.
It shows how hard the fight to protect marriage equality in MA was (we dodged a bullet in 2012 with Romney not being elected) was and how we had to fight tooth and nail in NY to get equality there.
I'll also say this about the book, I'm glad Marc Solomon held Democrat's feet to the fire in it.
You can't tell an honest story about the equality fight and pretend the Democrats were good while all the Republicans were evil.
Democrats history in the fight for same sex marriage is nothing for many of them to be proud of pre 2012, with Marc doing a good job of showing the times we were thrown under the bus or flat out betrayed by our them.
In particular, the New York Democrats betrayal stings most of all. Not only do I still remember when marriage equality failed, but the leader of the Senate Democrats then had the gall to tell our base not to target some of the bigoted no votes on their side and how we would never win if Republicans took control.
The NYS LGBT community ignored him and took out a couple of the bigoted Democrats and got equality (likely the last one) with Republicans in control of one branch of government.
Still an amazing thing to see happen three and a half years later.
Buy the book if you can, you won't regret it.
46. andrewofca | November 28, 2014 at 9:41 am

Zack, thanks for the recommendation. I'll be checking it out… I'm always looking for good reads.

I recently finished "Flagrant Conduct" – the recently published story of Lawrence vs Texas – would definitely recommend it.
47. scream4ever | November 28, 2014 at 9:59 am

Also recommend the book about Perry v Brown (I forget the name at the moment).
48. Zack12 | November 28, 2014 at 10:24 am

Have to check both of them out.
P.S. I noticed a typo in my post but can't change it now.. ARRRGGHH!
49. sfbob | November 28, 2014 at 10:53 am

The title is "Forcing the Spring." Author is Jo Becker.
50. davepCA | November 29, 2014 at 6:24 am

There is also the book by Bois and Olsen, "redeeming the Dream", specifically about the Prop 8 trial. I recommend it.
51. David_Midvale_UT | November 28, 2014 at 4:06 pm

Here in HATU—The Bass Ackwards State (Utah)—the leaders of the Utah State Democratic Party were too focused on kissing the backsides of the Locally Dominant Sect to try to retain their pathetic minority vote counts to lift so much as a pinkie toe to support equality. Utah politics is totally dysfunctional, so no intelligent person ought to have expected any different.
52. Zack12 | November 29, 2014 at 6:38 am

That is the problem with Democrats in so many states and it's why we are a mess right now.
Howard Dean is being proven right on how Democrats needed to focus on the local and state levels, such a shame our side still doesn't get that.
53. RemC_Chicago | November 28, 2014 at 11:32 am

Once again, I'm late to the commenting as Thanksgiving preparations completely consumed the last two days. I'd like to take this opportunity to say thank you to all of you who participate so avidly in these discussions and provide so much educational, enlightening information. It's an odd offshoot of the internet age that we develop "friends" with people across the country whom we may never meet. Reading EonT is a multiple daily exercise—I can't imagine going without it.
54. SethInMaryland | November 28, 2014 at 1:17 pm

i must say i got respect to a person who can put what the ppl want in front of his personal opinion: Finnish mp Lembit Kaljuvee said that while he was emotionally against the bill, every young person he talked to supported the bill. And so he decided to support it as well.
55. guitaristbl | November 28, 2014 at 2:07 pm

Are you sure you are talking about Finland ? Lembit Kaljuvee is an Estonian politician. It is likely he made such a statement since Estonia voted to legalize civil unions earlier this year.
56. SethInMaryland | November 28, 2014 at 2:15 pm

oh man yea ur right i read the artical wrong , there was a artical about finland and estonia on their new law , but i didn't notice untill i read it again , my bad yea , he's estonia not finland
57. Mike_Baltimore | November 28, 2014 at 2:23 pm

The vote in FINLAND was 105 in favor of ME, and 92 against ME:
http://www.advocate.com/world/2014/11/28/marriage…
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/11/28/uk-finla…

Oh, and according to whitepages.com, there are almost 3 dozen other people with the same first and last names as I have, in the US alone. My last name, as late as 2010, was not even in the top 1000 of last names in the US, an indication that even 'unusual' last names can be more 'popular' than one thinks would be possible.
58. guitaristbl | November 28, 2014 at 2:38 pm

And your comment is relevant to mine how exactly ? I am well aware of the votes in the Finnish parliament.
The rest of your comment is interesting but Lembit Kaljuvee is still an Estonian politician not a Finnish one. If that's not enough proof for you, Finnish people do not have last names such as Kaljuvee, this is clearly an Estonian last name.
59. Mike_Baltimore | November 28, 2014 at 2:55 pm

You asked "Are you sure you are talking about Finland ?"

And my last name is NOT English, but Dutch, and I live in the United States. Even so, are people ONLY allowed to discuss the news from their own nation? Then why do major news organizations have bureaus in other countries?
60. guitaristbl | November 28, 2014 at 3:23 pm

Yes but with the exception of the Swedish minority Finland is not as multicultural as the US in any possible way.
Of what relevance is the issue of people discussing things going on to other nations to the fact that I corrected Mike on a simple thing, that the mentioned politician is Estonian and not Finnish ?
I don't think you understood what's the issue here..
61. SethInMaryland | November 28, 2014 at 2:57 pm

yea i made a mistake , but i wouldn't be suprised if some ppl in finland have that name as well, Finland and Estonia languages and culture are very close , their many ppl who live in Finland that Estonia background to them, the relationship between Estonia and Finland is simliar like the US AND UK
62. guitaristbl | November 28, 2014 at 3:25 pm

I would disagree. While these two nations share cultural and lingual influences Estonian last names and Finnish last names are different and one can tell which is which. There may be some Estonians in Finland but I am not aware of any people of Estonian origin sitting in the Finnish parliament.
Anyway according to wikipedia this man is an Estonian politician in Estonia.
63. SethInMaryland | November 28, 2014 at 1:26 pm

ok so there are still a few step more that the law goes needs through , it now goes back to a committee, but it won't be the same that voted against the bill earlier this year instead it be sent to the Grand Committee( a commite that is highly in support in Marriage equality) and then it will go before the full parlament again then it will be approved , none of these votes will occur in this year though so we are looking at 2016 or maybie even 2017 before the law may even take effect
64. FinnAtHelsinki | November 28, 2014 at 11:04 pm

Actually both the Grand Committee and the whole parliament (again) will vote within a few weeks and after that the President will sign the initiative into law, probably by the end of the year. The reason that the law takes effect only in 2017 is that the proponents wanted to foreclose any argument that the schedule is too tight for required changes in other associated legislation, regulations and information systems. The vote was expected to be closer and every effort was made to secure passage of the initiative. It is possible that the schedule can be moved earlier if the next goverment coalition and parliament are favorable for marriage equality.
65. F_Young | November 28, 2014 at 3:40 pm

Brevard men file challenge to Florida ban on gay marriage in Orlando federal court
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/breaking-news…

I realize this couple was mentioned in an earlier article pointed at by a EoT comment, but this article may have more up-to-date information.
66. Elihu_Bystander | November 28, 2014 at 4:31 pm

For what am I thankful this Thanksgiving 2014?

I live in a very conservative part of CA—Kings County the West Coast home of Naval Aviation (I am a retired Navy Commander Dental Officer—26 years of active duty 1963-1989) and Tulare County the home of Sequoia Nat’l Park, also the heart of the San Joaquin Valley.

Yet in spite of that, 90 percent of the people in the community of Three Rivers are inclusive and inviting of me as I truly am—a person of good will who happens to be gay. I was in a same-sex relationship for 31 years until my partner passed in Sept-10. At the present time I am single and live alone. A Three Rivers family has invited me to their home to celebrate Thanksgiving as part of their extended family every year for the last three years.

I feel very safe and comfortable living here. I live in a condominium townhome complex consisting of 12 units. I have been elected to the board of trustees.

I know that I’m going to get some flack on this part. However, it is also part of the person who I am becoming. I am a Xian in the Roman Catholic tradition. (BTW there is nothing wrong with that spelling because the X is not the Roman letter ex, but rather the Greek letter chi the equivalent of which is Ch.) The hierarchy/magisterium of my church does not get it. But my local parish and pastors do. My local Catholic mission parish is just as open and inclusive as is Most Holy Redeemer in the Castro.
67. MichaelGrabow | November 28, 2014 at 8:39 pm

I'm sorry to hear about your loss, but am glad to hear that you're being welcomed by your community.
68. SeattleRobin | November 28, 2014 at 8:00 pm

I'm a day late, but I hope everyone found something to enjoy on Thanksgiving. I went to dinner with my sister's and aunt's families. They have all been supportive of me since I came out many years ago. So one of the things I'm thankful for is having a family in which I can be myself. Even some of my fundamentalist relatives have been surprisingly good about it.

I'm also very thankful for this website. It makes getting up to date info so easy by having it all in one place. And all the commenters here have added so much to my understanding of how our court systems function. It's rare these days to find an online forum where interesting conversations take place without much trolling or ignorant vitriol. Thank you all for providing a haven of intelligent conversation.

p.s. Seahawks won! Hehe.
69. Wolf of Raging Fires | November 29, 2014 at 8:26 am

So did the Eagles 😀
70. SeattleRobin | December 1, 2014 at 5:45 am

And we meet up next week!
71. Wolf of Raging Fires | December 1, 2014 at 7:41 am

It's on! Haha!
72. DACiowan | November 28, 2014 at 8:17 pm

I'm thankful that our political system and culture are waking up to the inherent decency of the LGBT population. Also on a personal note, all the late 60s psychedelia I've been YouTubing and getting on vinyl. "Then when the hurdy gurdy man comes singing songs of love…"
73. Ryan K (a.k.a. KELL) | November 29, 2014 at 10:04 am

Seriously off-topic: GO BLUE! #beatOhio #hailhail (you never know on any given day when 60 minutes have to be played on the field.)
74. BenG1980 | December 5, 2014 at 2:21 am

Ryan, I just saw this comment. Since the game is over now and we all know the outcome, it's not exactly fair for me to predict inevitable victory, but that's what I would have done had I been paying more attention to this thread over the weekend. 😉 Anyway, GO BUCKS!

(We have our work cut out for us this week against Wisconsin without either our first or second string QB, but crazier things have happened.)
75. jpmassar | November 29, 2014 at 5:17 pm

Finland:

The Interior Minister Päivi Räsänen has vowed that her Christian Democrats party will make further challenges against a bill to legalise same-sex marriage in the course of the next parliament, despite MPs voting yesterday in favour of the measure.

Appearing at a party gathering in Vantaa, Räsänen said her party still has the chance to oppose a further bill which will need to be passed after the next election in order to finalise the change to the statute.

Räsänen said the Christian Democrats will again oppose the law change when the issue comes up in the next parliamentary term.

http://yle.fi/uutiset/rasanen_vows_to_challenge_s…
76. davepCA | November 29, 2014 at 6:17 pm

…… so …..they have a "chance" …… ?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yCFB2akLh4s

: )
77. FinnAtHelsinki | November 30, 2014 at 12:29 am

Yes, they have a "chance" in terms of the video 🙂 In real life, no.

The report above and some news also in Finland are inaccurate. The marriage equality bill will be enacted into law by the current parliament within the next few weeks. It takes effect in 2017 without any further action by the next parliament. The further bills deal with associated legislation (e.g. what happens to the current civil partnerships) and are not necessary for the marriage equality per se.

The next parliament could in theory actively abolish marriage equality (or more likely the associated adoption rights) with another law, but, as I explain at length in the earlier comments of this thread, this is not going to happen. No major party has the will or political capital for this.
78. F_Young | November 30, 2014 at 9:21 am

This is an interesting overview of the history of same-sex marriage inequality in Texas.
http://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/houston/a…
79. FredDorner | November 30, 2014 at 4:35 pm

Good overview. There was also a same-sex marriage attempt in Milwaukee WI around 1971, as well as several licenses issued by the Boulder CO clerk in 1975.
http://www.jsonline.com/news/opinion/milwaukee-wo…
http://articles.latimes.com/2012/dec/22/local/la-…
80. almostfamous734 | November 30, 2014 at 9:37 pm

I am thankful for this website. First-time commenter here, but have been following the blog on a daily basis for quite some time. Michigan resident, obsessively rooting for SCOTUS to take up DeBoer v Snyder. Hope you all had a great Thanksgiving! 🙂
81. Randolph_Finder | December 1, 2014 at 4:49 am

Sort of an odd question.

Why did Virginia v. Loving have the state as one of the parties, but all of the current Marriage Equality suits are (Someone who wants a SSM) v (some politician)?
82. SeattleRobin | December 1, 2014 at 5:52 am

I don't know, but my guess is because it wasn't just a law banning such marriages, and thus only dealing with licenses, but actually criminalizing them. The Lovings had been arrested and were facing jail sentences if they were caught returning to the state.
83. wes228 | December 1, 2014 at 6:38 am

Loving v. Virginia dealt with a criminal conviction that was upheld by the Virginia Supreme Court. In civil matters, the sovereign (i.e. the state or the United States) is not allowed to be sued without their permission, hence why you have to sue the government agent himself in his official capacity (called the Ex Parte Young doctrine).

You see the same thing with Lawrence v. Texas: Lawrence and Garner were appealing a criminal conviction upheld by the Texas Supreme Court.
84. Sagesse | December 1, 2014 at 5:14 am

LGBT rights history. You may need to register to view, but the site offers five free articles a month.

High Court's First Gay-Issues Ruling

"With same-sex marriage litigation pending before the U.S. Supreme Court, lawyers and scholars are focusing intense interest on a long-forgotten, one-line ruling by the court in 1958 — the first decision the justices ever made regarding issues that directly impact gay rights.

"The ruling is One Inc. v. Olesen, in which the high court ruled, on First Amendment grounds, that a Los Angeles-based magazine for gays was not obscene and should be delivered to subscribers by the U.S. Post Office like any other publication."
http://www.nationallawjournal.com/home/id=1202677…

PS I'm stuck in the mobile view of the site at the moment. The saga continues.
85. F_Young | December 1, 2014 at 7:12 am

That case was absolutely critical. It would not have been possible for gay rights activism to ever arise as long as it was illegal to mail information about gay issues.
86. Randolph_Finder | December 1, 2014 at 8:10 am

Is there *any* chance that the Supreme court could do something similar to " One Inc. v. Olesen"?
I'd love to see
The petition for writ of certiorari is granted and the judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit is reversed. Windsor v. United States."
87. wes228 | December 1, 2014 at 8:57 am

No because Windsor v. United States, while strongly influential, cannot directly govern the outcome of this legal question. We will have a fully briefed and argued case with a written opinion.
88. Randolph_Finder | December 1, 2014 at 9:29 am

So we maybe could see for the Tennessee Case (Tanco v. Haslam)

The petition for writ of certiorari is granted and the judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit is reversed. (Insert Full Faith and Credit case here)"

(Though the closest type of cases to that are the Degree of Kinship Marriage laws and I'm not sure any of them have ever gone to the court)
89. SeattleRobin | December 1, 2014 at 5:58 am

I'm stuck in mobile mode also. I'm using a tablet, but want the desktop version because I can pinch and enlarge the otherwise teensy text. The mobile version doesn't allow that for some reason.

On other sites there's usually a link near the top to switch but I can't find one here. At the very bottom of the page it says mobile theme and then on/off buttons. But clicking on the off button only gives me a page can't be loaded response.

I hope this can be fixed so we can go back to the original format.

p.s. The home page is normal for me. But I'm forced into mobile mode when going to individual posts or comments.
90. Sagesse | December 1, 2014 at 6:31 am

I was able to go to the homepage, and click through to the top post, which then loaded in regular format. This sometimes works for me.
91. SeattleRobin | December 1, 2014 at 5:22 pm

A few months ago it was like that for me. But for the last few days I only get the mobile version on any page other than the home page. It's frustrating!